Ribnik v. McBride’s Empirical Analysis
277 U.S. 350 · 1928
Citation profile
23 federal appellate · 27 district · 126 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 239 later decisions (25 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 2019 · most notably Nebbia v. People of State of New York (1934), Near v. State of Minnesota Olson (1931)
23 federal appellate · 27 district · 126 state decisions — followed in 26 states
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on Village of Euclid Ohio v. Ambler Realty Co · Munn v. Illinois · Block v. Hirsh · Holden v. Hardy · Adkins v. Children's Hospital of the District of Columbia Same
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 239 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Under the decisions of this court it is no longer fairly open to question that, at least in the absence of a grave emergency (Tyson & Brother v. Banton, supra, pages 431, 437 [ 47 S. Ct. 426 ]), the fixing of prices for food or clothing, of house rental or of wages to be paid, whether minimum or maximum, is beyond the legislative power. And we perceive no reason for applying a different rule in the case of legislation controlling prices to be paid for services rendered in securing a place for an employee or an employee for a place.” (Emphasis supplied.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““To urge that extortion, fraud, imposition, discrimination and the like have been practiced to some, or a great, extent in connection with the business here under consideration, or that the business is one lending itself peculiarly to such evils, is simply to restate grounds already fully considered by this court. These are grounds for regulation but not for price fixing, as we have already definitely decided.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Engberg v. Debel“It is of course true that the enactment of a particular type of legislation, even though general, and a widespread and competent opinion that it is wise and necessary, do not establish its constitutionality.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.